5 ms·
I ignored any "social value", gender or age concerns in answering. It thinks I had a preference to save the elderly but otherwise ended up precisely on the cent
by throwawayReply 10y ago
I ignored any "social value", gender or age concerns in answering. It thinks I had a preference to save the elderly but otherwise ended up precisely on the center-line in most issues.
My rules however were simple: Avoid swerving, kill the people in the car over people outside all other things considered. If pedestrians are running the light they get less sympathy but I'm not going to swerve to hit them.
Forget the pets, why would anyone want to save them? Apparently some people did.
Also: How does a car know if someone is a "criminal" anyway and what does that mean? Does that mean a released felon would be "picked" to be run over if it face-detected them against a database of known persons? Criminals don't run around in stripes with bags of loot!
- Swenrekcah 10y agoI followed exactly the same line of reasoning except that I did swerve to save people crossing on a green light at the expense of people on a red light. The reasoning being something like: "The passenger of the car should absorb the risk of a car failure, not pedestrians. In the case pedestrians must die, protect those who follow the rules if possible." Incidentally my answers meant I always killed women instead of men...
- throwawayReply 10y agoI wonder if the test is adaptive, did it hone-in to differentiate preferences or present the same scenario set to everyone? It felt like it was honing in on my preference at the end, but I'm not sure.
- davidsong 10y ago> How does a car know if someone is a "criminal" anyway and what does that mean? Adware on everyone's phone is broadcasting a SocialWorthScore™, without one it's assumed to be a large negative number.